UK Column Radio

UK Column News Podcast 8th November 2024

Mike Robinson, Mark Anderson and Debi Evans with today's UK Column News. If you would like to support our independent journalism, please join the community: https://community.ukcolumn.org/ Sources: www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-8th-november-2024

Duration:: 1h 1m
Broadcast on:: 08 Nov 2024
Audio Format:: other

At Sprouts Farmers Market, we're all about fresh, healthy, and delicious. That's why you'll find the season's best organic produce hand-picked and waiting for you in the center of our store. We bring in local farm-fresh fruits and veggies bursting with flavor. Come on in to discover everyday favorites like juicy berries and crisp greens, but also unique peak season varieties like moon drop or cotton candy grapes. Visit your neighborhood Sprouts Farmers Market today where fresh produce is always in season. Good afternoon. It's Friday the 8th of November, 2024. Just after one o'clock, welcome to UK Column News. I'm your host Mike Robinson joining me today. We have Mark Anderson and Debbie Evans. Welcome to the program. We're going to get started with some good news apparently from Slovakia. If we put this on screen, we'll do a quick translation of it here. The headline says, "Fito has announced a COVID amnesty. The state will return the money for fines at the time of the pandemic." Robert Fito apparently has approved some legislation. It still has to be passed through Parliament in Slovakia. So depending on what they do, we will see whether it actually comes to fruition. But in the meantime, he's saying that anyone who was fined for violating COVID-19 measures can seek compensation for the state. Once this passes through Parliament and gets final approval, they will have six months from that date to apply for that compensation. He said the same option may also be available for those who have been placed on a so-called mandatory quarantine where they had to cover the mail fee at their own expense. And so they will also be able to apply to recover that cost as well. He's saying that the compensation was going to cost the country about 3.3 million euros. And he's saying that that's actually less than he thought it would be. But nonetheless, that money is going to be there to be claimed. And he's also talking about illegal amnesty for anybody that was prosecuted under this legislation because he's saying some people were finding it difficult to find jobs with the criminal record, I suppose, that came with that. So Debbie, maybe I could welcome you to the programme, first of all, and get your thoughts on this. Well, is it going to be rolled out in this country? I'm going to be asking because many people got punished. What about the politicians? Any politicians that were fined, et cetera, will they be getting it back? How is this going to work? But clearly, those fines should never have been imposed. Lock-up should never have happened, in my opinion, but perhaps more to talk about that in extra. Yes, Mark, any thoughts on whether that should be rolled out perhaps in the United States? How many people were prosecuted for breaking COVID restrictions in the US? Boy, I wish I knew the answer to that question, Mike. I don't know, but the principle is right. But as Debbie said, there will be others who won't pay the price they ought to pay for their malfeasance and their corruption. But at least it's a step in the right direction. Let's hope it passes that Parliament. Yes, indeed. So we'll keep everybody posted on that as it develops. Okay, Mark, let me bring you onto your first segment here. You want to talk about the Council for Foreign Relations and what they think about Donald Trump's election? Yeah, Donald Trump, will he be the savior? Will he be the bane for freedom? It's an interesting question a lot of people are asking it. One way to measure a politician is what the globalists think about him and what better globalist organization than the Council on Foreign Relations, which of course has an ideological linkage to Chatham House. Anyway, this first slide, former President Donald Trump is vying for another term to continue his "America First" policies, which offer a marked departure from previous Democratic and Republican presidential administrations. Excuse me. What's notable there, Mike, is that the CFR sees Donald Trump as being different from other Republican administrations, not just different from the obviously different Democrats. So Trump, in a way, has redefined the Republican Party. It appears to be more populist. It appears to be less globalist. These things can be nuanced. We have to wait and see the proof is in the pudding. Nevertheless, I call this as this slide shows the CFR's globalism exam of Donald Trump, and he doesn't get exactly a good grade from the CFR. If he were in school, he'd at least be getting a D, maybe a D minus. The things that were covered, AI and technology, China, climate change, defense and NATO, global health and pandemic prevention, immigration and border security, inflation debt and the economy, Israel, Gaza and the Middle East, Russia, Ukraine and lastly trade. This is the things the CFR graded him on. Moving on from there, I'll hit the highlights. This is right from the CFR report and exam of Donald Trump. Trump has sought to confront China over what he says is a suite of economic abuses, intellectual property theft, currency manipulation, export and other subsidies, and even economic espionage. He says aggressive action is required to protect American workers and reduce U.S. large bilateral trade deficit. Trump says his policies would completely eliminate dependence on China in all critical areas, including dependency on electronic steel and pharmaceuticals. That last one is a sensitive one. As President, excuse me, Trump started what the CFR calls a trade war with China, applying tariffs that now average 18% to hundreds of billions of dollars worth of Chinese goods. Trump has floated tripling these tariffs, tariffs if reelected. This was right before the election. Moving on, Trump has said he would revoke China's most favored nation status. That's another big one. A trade status that the U.S. granted China when it joined the WTO back in '01. Trump says he would adopt a four-year plan to phase out imports of essential goods from China. A lot of American workers support that, of course. The Republican platform calls for restricting Chinese investment in U.S. real estate and industry. Let's park there for just a moment. You remember my recent reports on Chinese insourcing and near-sourcing, where it could go as far as Chinese companies buying real estate in the U.S. and selling and manufacturing Chinese-made goods within U.S. borders. That's insourcing. That's a really important point right there that the CFR is bringing out. Moving on, still looking at that same image, Trump has emphasized that these tariffs and other import restrictions would apply to essential medicines, such as penicillin, which he says should be produced in the United States. So some more economic self-sufficiency is being talked about there. I'll kind of cherry-pick some of this. The Trump administration condemned Beijing's state-led industrial policy, which seeks to make China a world leader in advanced technology. While in office, Trump's first term, he introduced export controls on semiconductors and chip-making equipment to prevent China from acquiring such technologies. And back in 2018, Trump back some reform, giving U.S. regulators greater power to review foreign acquisitions by China and other countries and block several attempts of U.S. technology companies to Chinese firms. So he blocked several attempted sales of U.S. technology companies to Chinese firms just to make that clear and ramped up restrictions on Chinese telecommunications giant at Huawei. However, you say it, worrying that such firms can be manipulated by Beijing, but he now opposes Trump, opposes the potential ban of TikTok. And we'll keep going here and try and summarize this up as clearly as we can. This slide is a little longer. I summarized it to the right here. Climate change is regarding Donald J. Trump, according to the CFR. Number one, Trump doubts climate change and science, they say, that he doubts the science. Trump wants more fossil fuels partly to tame inflation. Number three, Trump would again leave the Paris Climate Accord like he did during 2017, right when the Bilderberg meeting started in Virginia. And the CFR says Trump opposes a widespread electric vehicle scheme, calling it a major tax burden. Of course, how would you tame inflation with more fossil fuels? Well, if you get the cost of fuels down, that means the delivery of goods to the various markets goes down and therefore the price tags of goods and services can go down. That's the connection between fuels and inflation. Now, this is also the CFR talking about foreign policy, of course. This is to do with NATO. Trump says he'll reassess the U.S. role in NATO. A Transatlantic Defense Alliance founded to counter the Soviet threat. The CFR also says Trump harshly criticized NATO back during his first term, reportedly telling top European officials in 2020 that NATO is dead, which of course is an overstatement, and repeatedly threatened to abandon the alliance. I'm not sure that those threats were really all that genuine, but it was good rhetoric at the time. And the CFR, and I emphasize this, I added the emphasis on this. The CFR says Trump has long vocalized his opposition to NATO's collective defense clause, which stipulates that other NATO allies must come to the defense of a member country if it is attacked. Excuse me. That's really critical. That echoes what Pat Buchanan used to say, that if Estonia is attacked by Russia, let's say should American boys die on that battlefield, Pat Buchanan would ask that question. Anyway, I wrote up some of this based on what the CFR said. This summarizes all the different talking points. Defense and NATO, more military spending, yet reduced troop presence abroad. This is what Trump would do, increased military spending, but at the same time, reduce our troop presence, inflation debt and the economy. Trump oversaw the passage of a 2017 bill that lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 to 21%. He changed the way multinational firms are taxed, and he lowered the individual income tax rates, which kind of answers the criticism that Trump would sometimes get that he's only catering to the rich. By lowering individual income tax rates, he was trying to say that he cared about everybody. Some of these provisions the CFR reminded us are set to expire in 2025 unless Congress reauthorizes them. The Republican platform reportedly calls for making these tax adjustments permanent. Trump has called, and I added this emphasis, Trump has called for further lowering the corporate tax rate to 15% for firms that make their goods in the U.S. And he would eliminate taxes, he says, on tips and social security benefits. That's a nod to the poorer classes. That's a nod to the senior citizens. And some other summaries on the different CFR points in their exam, global health pandemic prevention. Trump did authorize the public private operation Warp Speed in 2020 for a particularly fast COVID backs development. Yet that same year, he froze WHO funding and condemned lockdowns. That's the World Health Organization. So that's kind of an interesting nuance. Immigration and border security. Trump also promises to increase counter narcotics cooperation with neighboring governments such as Mexico, which is similar to what former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio has told me personally, work with Mexico internally to prevent a lot of contraband and cartel assets from getting to the U.S. in the first place. In other words, plus Trump supposedly would implement history's largest deportation plan ever. That remains to be seen. He would reinstate remain in Mexico where you have to stay there to apply for amnesty and birthright citizenship. Trump supposedly would also end birthright citizenship and continue border wall construction. Other categories, as we wind this up, Trump repeatedly says that he proudly supports Israel. His travel bans to the U.S. may include Gazans, and Trump feels Iran, at least in terms of Trump's official statements. He feels Iran is the top terrorism sponsor. He feels Putin made a mistake invading Ukraine, but Trump likely won't support U.S. aid to Ukraine. And Trump supposedly wants to end the war as soon as possible, Mike. We've often heard that one of the first things in office that he would do is allegedly end that war. So that's a fairly detailed summation of what the CFR has to say about Trump. And even though they wrote this objectively and as unbiasedly as they could, you can detect their disdain and you can detect the fact that they're concerned that Trump runs contrary to so many of their globalist principles. But Mike, you might want to chime in on this. Well, Mark, the first question is, who do you think he's going to end up with in his team? He's obviously selected his main advisor there. But Mike Pompeo's name, for example, has come back into the mix potentially for defense and so on. I mean, who else do you think might be potentially in his team? And therefore, you know, he is saying lots of positive things, but what do you think his ability to actually obtain those is? That's a good question. Well, one of the ironies, of course, is the very Council on Foreign Relations that's giving this overview and grading him is one of the organizations that opposes what he wants to do. And they have a lot of power getting people into office, getting people perhaps even into Trump's administration who actually carry the torch for the CFR. So the CFR itself will oppose it in some direct or indirect way. One of the things I'm hearing talking to a lot of friends, talking to a lot of people whose opinions I value is that Trump's going to have to really produce. He's going to really be under the microscope by his own supporters and he's got one term to do it and they're going to be very skeptical if he starts turning away from his core promises. Who he selects is a little soon to be. It's a little soon to tell who he'll select. Mike Pompeo, of course, is a neo-con largely a hawk, very hawkish, defense-wise. I think it would be better if he avoided Pompeo, a former Kansas Congressman, and former head of the CIA for a short time. But I think that'd be a good report for next week, Mike, is take a look at some of the people he's beginning to sign on. He just got started. And it's pretty clear he has a lot of support, obviously in the United States because he won the popular vote, even which is something that hasn't happened in quite a long time. But I mean, a lot of support internationally and including in the UK for what he stands for and what he represents. And so what do you think about that and the fact that the expectations that he is going to deliver? Well, the expectations are high, as I mentioned. And even in the UK, those that support him and put confidence in him just like here, what they need to do is they need to raise H E double L. If he doesn't abide by at least his core promises, a lot of people here are going to be looking at the border and the deportation thing. One of the slippery points, of course, is Israel. There's a lot of nuance there. We can talk about it a little bit in extra. He tries to play both sides of the field a little bit. We'll get into that, but that'll be one of the tougher points. But in the days and weeks ahead, Mike, I and others in the UK column, of course, we'll be bringing out a lot more about this. OK, thanks, Mark, and we will talk more about this in extra. But let's move on then to Vladimir Putin. And he's been speaking at the Valdai Club yesterday and gave out one of our presentation. And then stood up for three hours of questions. He didn't have a script for any of this. He was talking about Trump and offering Trump his congratulations for winning the elections and so on. But he was really suggesting that the United States has been off the rails for quite some time now and in fact the Western world in general. So he said that 20 years or more are likely to be extremely difficult and turbulent ahead because of a harsh struggle, a deep clash over the fundamental principles guiding international relations. He warned of a threat to humanity, talking about potential for aggressive anarchy and abandoning traditional values. He talked about Western elites' blind belief in their impunity and exceptionalism, that that could lead to global disaster. He talked about Western liberalism having devolved into a form of intolerance toward any kind of independent or sovereign thought. He talked about crises and systemic crises intensifying in Western countries and that Russia doesn't say that Russia doesn't see Western civilization as an enemy. He rejects the else versus them mentality. He was talking about the dollar and the fact, well, as he perceives it, the dollar is, you know, he said Russia is not abandoning the dollar. He's effectively said the dollar is abandoning Russia and that it's an act of suicide on the part of the United States because the dollar is the main pillar of the par and therefore they're effectively excluding Russia from that and other countries abandoning it as a result is pretty devastating for them. So many other points to make there and we'll maybe talk a little bit more about that an extra as well, but it's well worth listening to the presentation, if anybody's interested. But let's come back to the UK then and Debbie, we've got, what are we talking about? Climate health, one health, these types of topics? Well, yes, the first thing I'm going to say is, whoa, I've been down a rabbit hole and you'll know why I've said that in this. So on Monday's news, Ben Rubin was talking about the impact that climate change was having on health. He talked about the global consortium on climate and health education. He talked about terracotta, and he also talked about the Pascal Sorio, CEO of AstraZeneca. So will climate change in inverted commas kill the most people? Well, I think we've got a bit of a competition on and here's why. So I want to introduce you to zoonosis because I'm sure a lot of you have heard of the term zoonosis. What is it? Well, it's any disease or infection that's naturally transmissible, naturally transmissible from vertebrate animals to humans, 200 types of zoonosis, rabies, and of course the vaccination that we know about is one of them. However, I also want to introduce you to reverse zoonosis. Now, what is reverse zoonosis? There's only limited amount of research on this, on how disease spreads from humans to animals. And this paper goes on, or at least this article in Discover Magazine goes on to say and to remind us that pandemics like the 1918 flu and COVID in inverted commas were derived from zoonotic and reverse zoonosis process. However, only the zoonotic or only zoonosis has been focused on, but now reverse zoonosis has thought to be a global threat and they're saying more research is needed. So, you know, we're looking at all of this one health, and I want to take you back to the WHO, of course, who talk about one health, which is basically linking humans, animals, the environment to global health security because that's what it's all about. But we actually have our own one health institute, so the UC Davis one health institute, you can see here that it's, it professes to train future leaders. But what is it? What does it actually say it's doing? So, because of the one health narrative, they say that because of humans have spread out, we've mixed with animals more, so therefore that's affecting how we feel and it's affecting disease. So, how about separating us? You can see, perhaps, where 15-minute cities are coming in because where do domestic vets feature in 15-minute cities and we'll be finding out more soon with Roger Mecock? So, these are some of the agendas that they deal in, and you can see the pre-empt project. That's pre-empting threats. Zoonotic diseases like Ebola and Lassa, Halley Project, Bovine TB, Predict Project, Surveillance and Wildlife, and we've got the Global Virome Project there, which is ending the pandemic era, so a lot going on at UC Davis. But I want to introduce you to WHOA, and what is WHOA? Well, welcome to the World Organization of Animal Health, and it sounds a bit like WHO, doesn't it? But they say, and you might disagree with this, but they say that they operate independently and they want to improve animal health and welfare. They were founded over 100 years ago, and they've got 28 founding nations, and they want to work together on one health. And I've got a little bit of video. We've edited it down. Please go and have a look at the full video, because just listen to what they actually or who they actually are. Collaboration across sectors and disciplines through a one health approach is a vital need for addressing the complex health challenges facing our society. No one organization can do it alone. Therefore, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the UN Environment Program, the World Health Organization and the World Organization for Animal Health, have come together as a quadrupartite. They have launched the One Health Joint Plan of Action to integrate and coordinate strategies and actions across the human, animal, plants, and environmental sectors. This new plan focuses on supporting and scaling up countries' capacities in six main areas, health systems, zoonotic diseases, neglected tropical and vector-borne diseases, food safety, antimicrobial resistance, and the environment. It promotes the health of humans, animals, plants, and the environment are providing guidance and tools to coordinate multisectoral approaches to prevent and manage health risks at the human, animal, plant, environment interface. There is only one planet and one health. Together, we can build a safer, healthier, fairer, and sustainable world for all. Independent A doesn't sound very independent to me, and they also welcome the G20's unified commitment to advancing the One Health approach. This was just published on November 1. What do they say? What do they say about that? Well, they're calling for collaborative, intersectoral, and multidisciplinary actions to address knowledge gaps and strengthen surveillance. That's what this is all about, surveillance, prevention, preparedness, they want to respond to future health emergencies, and of course, they're mentioning antimicrobial resistance. So who heads this organization? Well, this is Dr. Emmanuelle Suboron. She was the Chief Veterinary Officer and the Deputy Director General for the Food Ministry Agriculture in France, and she spearheaded large-scale prevention programs on avian, flu, and vaccinations. She's also managed a budget of 40 million and a staff of 500, and this is what she says. She says, "By championing collaboration across sectors and borders, we can build a resilient global health framework that addresses challenges like AMR." Now, I won't show you the little bit of video because there is a bit of video online where you can see Dr. Suboron talking, so please go and have a look on YouTube at that. But let's look a bit more at the Woa, as I call them, because the council meets twice a year in Paris. They have a world assembly of delegates, so you can see how kind of similar to the WHO in the United Nations and all of these bodies, it sounds. But I want to know who was sitting at the table for the United Kingdom, so who is sitting at the table? Well, here we have Professor Christine Middlemiss, and Professor Christine Middlemiss is our Chief Vet. And she has a farming background. She was from Scotland, actually. She's got a specialty in beef and sheep, and she was appointed as Chief Vet of New South Wales as well in 2018. She's very much into biosecurity, and she also led the Deaf Retraceability Public Health Policy team. So you can see kind of what agenda she's into and she sits on the council. But let's go back to Woa, because I'd never heard of them before, and they are a multi-donor trust fund. That sounds suspicious, doesn't it? Voluntary contributions they operate on. So basically it's a big PPP, a public private philanthropic partnership, but with WHO? Who do they collaborate with? Well, it didn't take long to find the same old names, and here we go. We've got the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and of course, let's not forget Bill and Melinda Gates also fund Perbright, which is Animal Research. We've got World Bank Fair, Pew Research, Dogs Trust, World Trade Organization, UNDP, which is the United Nations Development Program, and let's go and see what they do, what do Woa do, because the website is huge. I just want to focus on a couple of things. We've got MPOCs, we've got AVM Flu in cattle, AVM Flu. We've got AVM Flu in Antarctica. We've got also other AVM Flu articles, and I just want to remind people that you might not know, but actually, a farm has just, in Yorkshire, has just gone through a mass cull of birds in the last couple of days, because of AVM Flu, H5N5, I believe this was. So, let's go back to antimicrobial resistance very briefly to tie this segment up, and antimicrobial resistance, imagine a world where infections and diseases in humans, animals and plants are impossible to treat, can you see what's coming? And they say that AMR is a growing threat to animal and human health, and finally, on this segment, my final, my final slide is, I'm afraid we're going to AI, artificial intelligence, because you know what, artificial intelligence is going to be involved, and mRNA is going to be the way we go to forward with animals, so mRNA all the way, and they're going to be concentrating, first of all, on C-DIF, C-DIF is all. I do hope Dr. Sabine Hazan is watching this, because C-DIF, she is the queen of C-DIF, and to use mRNA in a condition that involves nausea and vomiting after taking antibiotics is, in my opinion, extremely difficult. Thanks, Debbie, thanks. Now, let's move on to digital ID, and you'll be glad to know that in Australia, Anthony Albanese has just announced that social media platforms, which are doing harm to our kids, is what he said. He is calling time on that by making it illegal for any person under the age of 16, or 16 and younger, to access any social media platforms at all. He's saying, if you're a 14-year-old kid getting this stuff at a time where you're going through life changes and maturing, it could be a really difficult time, and what we're doing is listening and then acting. So, he's saying, basically, it doesn't matter what your parents think, it would be absolutely illegal for anybody under the age of 16 to be accessing social media platforms. Now, no country has tried to do this so far, and of course, they're talking about requiring age verification methods like biometrics, government identification, and so on, in order to force social media, this age cut off. So, that is going on. Nobody would be surprised to know that the uni party is fully on board because the opposition Liberal Party in Australia has expressed support for this. Now, many people will think this is a great idea, that there is damage being done to children by social media, and I would have some sympathy with that point of view, but this is, of course, nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with driving the digital ID agenda and that policy through, and I just want to very briefly remind everybody what we covered a couple of days ago on this, the UK government here has now established an office for digital identities and attributes. This is the website, this is one of their blog posts here, a way to prove that you're, sorry, a way to prove who you are that is fit for the UK's digital economy. They're talking about the problem that basically you're having to give away your, in order to get the convenience of not having to deal with this so-called patchwork or paperwork, you're giving away your rights effectively to your data. There is a better way to check that someone is who they say they are, this is called digital identity digital identity can make people's lives easier, and unlock billions of pounds of economic growth. So they're doing this without any form of government identity card they say, instead you'll be able to choose from a range of digital identity and attribute providers based on the private and charity sectors. And if you remember we were talking about this organization UKAS, the UK digital identity and attributes trust framework the fact that there's over 50 companies over a race signed up for this. But what I really wanted to focus on here again was this piece of legislation which has just gone into the House of Lords, or it's been launched from the House of Lords as a government backed bill, the data brackets use and access bill. This is a change, but not a significant change from the UK government, sorry the previous Tory government's efforts to do this so let's just have a look at what they're talking about here they're talking about creating a framework for digital ID. They're talking about the enabling of the use of AI to make legally binding decisions, enabling easier data sharing, enabling police and personal data, sorry, enabling police to access personal data using automated systems without recording the reason for that. Enabling companies to delay answering subject access requests or data deletion requests by basically giving companies the opportunity to come back and ask you more questions about why you want this information and so on. It enables the use of data for commercial purposes under the guise of research, and it weakens the independence of the information commissioner. So it is really quite a spectacular piece of software we're going to talk much more about this later on in another segment about AI because this is related and particularly the fact that this this bill enables AI to make decisions which are then binding on us as individuals. So that's after the ad break but first of all let's do that let's just mention that if you would like to support us we do need your support support dot UK column is the place to go there are options to help us there you can make a donation for example, you can join as a member and there are various options for that you could pick something up at the UK column shop. And you can buy something from cloud cloud to car.com via the link on this page which will then we will get a small percentage won't cost you anymore to do that but we'll get a small percentage of the fee. We do need to share material you find on the platforms share buttons are on all the articles and videos on the UK column website. Please go there and have a look and also you can access comments from there as well. Now yesterday we put out a pretty hard presentation by, Jose Vega and doctor, oh my goodness me, problem with Paul motor thank you and so that is on there. It is hard watch we do advise viewer discretion as you watch this, but please do watch it and share it because it's extremely important and Debbie, the petition in Wales you wanted to add some more details about this. Yes I did and thank you so much to Nicola Lund for sending me this Alison Butler herself is a diagnosed vaccine injured. And she has challenged the Welsh government but saying that there's no pathway for those with vaccine injuries there literally being absolutely refused any help and this petition has been removed but many times on social media. She has appealed to Meta Meta are refusing to speak to her order change the decision so please support her and anyone can sign it even if you're not in Wales. And Debbie the MHRA board meeting upcoming. Yes please sign up Tuesday November the 19th of the morning more than Maria I have my ticket and I will be there. Okay super thank you now let's come on to add to microbial resistance Debbie. Yeah let's and let's start with your favourite person Michael one of them let's start off with Dame Sally Davis we've got a little bit of video she was speaking couple of weeks ago at the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Symposium let's have a listen. The title of my keynote is pharmaceutical medicine meeting the global challenges. Of course with my background I'm going to focus on antimicrobial resistance and anti infectives particularly the antibiotic emergency but I'm going to build on the political declaration that was agreed at the high level meeting of the UN General Assembly mid September where I was honoured to represent the government. I hope I'm going to see you at this event because looking at the program it's fabulous even with Jonathan Van Tam now he ought to be a pull for everyone but there's going to be great networking and lots of learning so see you there. And I know you'll be gutted to have missed Jonathan Van Tam will come to that on another news but I want to just highlight this week I have reported antimicrobial resistance worse than climate change. So the whole AMR agenda has been triggered because Dame Sally Davis lost her good God daughter at the age of 38 and now this has become one of the most acute emergencies on the planet apparently Sky News. Back in 2019 war and 10 million could die every year claiming more lives than cancer and diabetes and I just want to show you a array of academic papers that say exactly the same if you believe it. So we've got nature 40 million deaths by 250 nice bit of fear mongering there drug resistant infections will rise by 70% nature portfolio. Fleming initiative don't forget we did a big piece on the Fleming initiative and the Fleming Center on antimicrobial resistance they say its antibiotic resistance is the right fight of the century and another nature article here antimicrobial resistance a silent pandemic. And it's everybody that's involved in it including the World Bank Group. So they say the AMR is a threat to our economic future on par with the 2008 financial crash. And then if we go on to antibiotic research, they're suggesting that we have mRNA vaccines and that they will protect us from antimicrobial resistance now isn't that interesting and curious. And then we'll look at trends in modern medicine, where we can quite clearly see the mRNA vaccine platforms apparently could prevent bacterial infections now this is looking at chemo prophylaxis. This is basically vaccinating healthy people so they don't get infections and who's in who else is in the agenda and who else is big in this, of course, Pfizer and they're busy cooking up new antibiotics in their chemical kitchen. One of them is called M. Blavio for gram negative infections. And if we look at the study in the Lancet looking at the use of these antibiotics in hospitals, we're looking at hospital acquired pneumonia ventilator associated pneumonia intra abdominal infections of course Pfizer all very worried about this, which is why you need these new probably untested antibiotics and nature reviews have just public published this paper and they say the call for the concept of mRNAs groundbreaking. However, they do urge caution because they say there are gaps in knowledge and what they warn of is that the mRNA coming up through the pipeline is going to be way more potent and looking at mRNA for bacteria and parasites. And then we'll go on to look at the news medical who are looking at a new pathway discovery, which is explaining MRSA, high level antibiotic resistance. Now, those of you who have been in hospital for operations, you might remember you get swabbed for MRSA, you're not allowed to be in hospital with MRSA, it's a skin infection. If it gets inside you, it can cause you to be very sick. And here we've got Forbes reporting that the European agency are reporting of shortages in antibiotics. Well, that's a coincidence. And also cancer treatments, they blame this on manufacturing disruptions, regulatory challenges, but you can find out much more because we've covered so much on antimicrobial resistance. It really is being ramped up hugely at the moment, so please keep an eye. But as I said before in the previous segment, when all else fails, let's just get AI to make new antibiotics. Do you trust artificial intelligence to make an antibiotic? I don't, but it's over to you, Mike. That's a very good question. So let's just let's just look at a follow on from the digital ID segment and look at what's going on with with AI. Now, first of all, Meta. And well, interesting story here because Nick Clegg has published a Nick Clegg. This is the former liberal Democrat leader, former deputy prime minister who's now has been working for Meta for quite a number of years now has published this blog post saying open source AI can help America lead an AI and strengthen global security. So what's he saying here? Meta's open source llama models. That's what they call their AI models are increasingly being used by a broad community of researchers, entrepreneurs, developers and government bodies. We are pleased to confirm that we are also making llama available to us government agencies, including those that are working on defense and national security applications and private sector partners working and supporting their work. Now, this is very unfortunate because Meta's terms and conditions for llama and accessing their AI saying that you are not allowed to engage in promote insight, facilitate or assist in the planning or development of activities that present a risk of death or bodily harm to individuals, including use of llama to, and they say that you're not allowed to use it in for military warfare nuclear industries or applications espionage used for materials or or activities that are subject to international traffic arms regulations maintained by the United States and the Department of State. So that's unfortunate, but they're flying ahead with this. Anyway, Clegg went on to say we're partnering with companies, including Accenture, federal services, Amazon web services, and Dural, Booz Allen, Databricks, Deloitte, IBM, Lidos, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Oracle, Palantir, Scale AI and Snowflake to bring llama to government agencies and have highlighted Palantir there because, of course, we've got to remember the Palantir. One thing that Palantir is doing is to give Israel the technical ability to prosecute its genocide and Gaza. But the other thing, as Debbie has been highlighting for quite some time, is that Palantir is right in the midst of the National Health Service. And, of course, they are supporting the National Health Service rollout of all the new technology that the NHS is pushing, including the app. And so at this point, we take the opportunity, as Debbie will be pleased to see, to highlight hashtag scrap the app, and there's another campaign that people can be getting involved in. But Bloomberg then, in their coverage of this story, said that the headline here is meta opens and say, "I models to US defense agencies and contractors." This wasn't in the meta blog post, but Bloomberg saying that they were told that the company said it would also share its technology with the members of the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance, Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand, in addition to the United States. So, that should make us all feel much better, shouldn't it? But don't worry, Clegg said this, "These kinds of responsible and ethical uses of open-source AI models like LAMA will not only support the prosperity and security of the United States, they will also help establish US open-source standards in the global risk for AI leadership." Now, the global risk for AI leadership includes the United Kingdom, and it is also attempting to establish standards. And so the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has just published this report assuring a responsible future for AI. And AI assurance is something that they are extremely keen to create a brand out of and really make us happy to continue to use AI and be positive about the potentials for AI. So they're saying using AI as central to the government's plans for reforming the country's public services and wider economy, going hand-in-hand with ensuring public trust in the innovations which will ultimately deliver these reforms. Now, we've got to think about this quite a bit, because if we remember the digital ID section a few minutes ago, it was very clearly made that the point was made that AI would be able to make legally binding decisions. We'll talk a bit more about that in a second. They said in this report that around 524 firms currently make up the slice of the UK's AI sector, employing more than 12,000 people and generating more than 1 billion pounds. These businesses provide organizations with the tools they need to develop or use AI safely. Do we believe that? So, if AI is making decisions, we already have seen how it makes decisions with respect to content being taken down from platforms and so on. And the fact that it becomes increasingly difficult to engage with platforms that are using AI to do this kind of stuff because the decisions are arbitrary, it seems, and automated. And if you click on the button that says appeal this decision, then there's another arbitrary automated decision made by AI, and there's no human intervention in this at all. So, I just wanted to very briefly look at how AI is already being talked about being used in the criminal justice system in the UK. So, let's look at AI criminal justice, and they're talking about using AI to map criminality around the country, and this is really feeding into future crime sort of thing. We'll see that in a second, using AI for official recognition and rolling out official recognition in public places on a widespread basis. Using AI for predictive policing, that should put a chill down anybody's spine, because this is the stuff of movies and so on going back 10 or 20 years. Automating legal research for perhaps that's a more reasonable one, but nonetheless, the increasingly AI being rolled out in the court systems as well. So, Mark, I don't know if you've got any thoughts on this, but it seems to me, AI increasingly becoming a central part of our lives, it is increasingly becoming a central part of how government is going to be done and how we interface with government. And I've just highlighted the criminal justice system is one example of that, but it's everywhere throughout access to government and so on. And governments are very keen to move ahead with this, without considering the potential negative implications. Is there any discussion or pushback on this in the United States? One thing I read about Donald Trump is he believes in a highly aggressive, competitive way of pursuing AI on a global scale, the US being number one, that sort of thing. What struck me as you were talking, Mike, is if AI makes critical decisions, that begins to encroach on the very idea of having members of parliament, congressmen, passing laws. You talked about an appeal process where AI makes some arbitrary decision and you can supposedly appeal it, but what does that do for court challenges? Can you take that to court and say this AI thing misrule, it ruled against me in a wrong way and in an improper or unconstitutional way? It would seem to be another way to separate the people from their decision makers and reduce our way of having any redress of grievances. That's my initial thoughts on this. Indeed. And of course, in the UK here, we have this massive backlog within the criminal justice system of court cases that haven't been heard yet and so on. And the pressure absolutely is on to make criminal justice much more inverted commas efficient. And I see that as a major danger. But anyway, let's move on from that back to health mark. And what's the latest from the United States on the floridation? Well, Mike, it involves Donald Trump and RFK Jr. as we'll see in a few moments, an interesting judicial decision as well. I wrote up a news brief that I'm reading from as I recite what's going on. The big media already on the ropes from Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos coming clean. The newspaper candidate endorsements are meaningless and the press only has itself to blame for its increasingly steep decline. The media is still incorrigibly perpetuating the philosophy of statism and that's what behind is behind this. The state is philosophy almost a religion. This world this world view holds that government power and the policies that stem from it. No matter how ill advised unlawful or arbitrary they may be and that applies to AI to AI as well. It holds that these are basically sacrosanct decisions. When it comes to water fluoridation like AI, if government experts have decreed based on science, that mass fluoridation of public water supplies is a good thing, then it's got to be a good thing. Words to the contrary be damned. This is my own editorial here. I'm also adding in this editorial, but along comes a federal judge in California who issued a ruling against the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, thereby ordering officials to take corrective action over potential health risks stemming from the currently recommended levels of fluoride in the American drinking water supply. The ruling by District Court Judge Edward Chen, Northern Federal District of California and Obama appointee. This ruling dealt a blow to what major media are calling public health groups, chiefly government agencies, in the ongoing debate on whether the benefits of continuing to add fluoride to public water supplies outweigh the risk. And I also added in my news brief here, Judge Chen noted that his ruling "does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health, but the judge did say that the evidence of its potential risk has become convincing enough to justify forcing the EPA to take action. While some contend more research may be needed about what CBS News called "the lower levels of fluoride exposure typically found in US drinking water," Judge Chen in his ruling also said, "there is not enough of a margin of safety at those levels." Very interesting, and we'll go on from there. Here's a very important quote from Judge Edward Chen, Northern Federal District of California. "In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health. It is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States." This is the decision, Mike, that fluoride skeptics have been waiting for for generations. This is a breath of fresh air like you can't believe, and it is significant. The Trump-RFK thing came into play. The night before election day I wrote here, news reports blared that Republican Donald Trump and fellow traveler RFK Jr. were beginning to question the fluoride regime, which is a sin in the eyes of a media protected medical establishment that is willfully blind to a principal decades ago discussed by our very interesting journalist, Canadian journalist and outspoken fluoridation skeptic, Gordon Sinclair. This guy was quite a personality. Let me tell you, Sinclair insisted that individuals who choose to use fluoride can do so without government forcibly fluorinating the entire public water supply. Such a collectivist policy, he noted, is a rigid medical mandate that fails to consider whether some people might be harmed in the mass fluoridation process. And with that, I believe we have a video coming up, but let's quote RFK Jr. briefly. This is what he had to say amid the controversy. On January 20, RFK said, the Trump White House will advise, he says, will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water. This is another big promise that Trump's going to have to try and keep. RFK went on to say, fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, ITU loss, particularly in children, neurodevelopment disorders and thyroid disease. And that's what RFK Jr. had to say. With that, we have a very interesting quote from the late great Gordon Sinclair. This is Gordon Sinclair. The report that letters have reached assignment editors and connects with stories about fluoridation of the public water supply of Canadian communities and their critical letters. Criticism is based on the claim that only one side, the pro side, has been given in this controversial manner and listeners are entitled to hear the opposing view. Well, now I'm a writer and a broadcaster, not a medical man, dentist, nutritionist or anything else that qualifies me as an expert, but I am a mature citizen who opposes the dumping of this chemical into the water, and I grasp this opportunity to say why I object. Primarily, I object to being forced to take a medication that I don't like, don't want, and no will do me no good so long as I live. It's claimed by those who wish to insert this poison into our water, and it is a poison that in proper doses, it's useful to the teeth of growing children up to the age of 11 or 12. There are many intelligent researchers who say even this claim is too sweeping and rosy. There are many who claim it is untrue, but let us allow that it is true for this argument. Now, if this chemical is useful to some of the teeth of some of the children under some conditions, why do they wish to force it into all of the water of all of the people all of the time? The dose can't be accurately measured because we don't all drink the same amount of water. We aren't all the same size. Children, in my experience, drink very little water. And yet those who favor this chemical want to put in the water that we use for washing cars or dishes, filling swimming pools, dosing fires, hosing streets, and everything else for which water is used. And so far as my community is concerned, that being Toronto, they insist on doing it without a vote of the people. I asked Dr. Gordon Bates, one of the principal pushers of the chemical, why he and his people insisted on forcing this into our water without a vote. His answer was that a vote would stir up emotions, and citizens would not be calm and intelligent enough to mark a ballot. He likened my suggestion to asking a vote on the design of a bridge. If the experts say the bridge is good, we believe them. Therefore, if experts, his so-called experts, say this chemical will not harm adults, but will help the teeth of children, then we must accept what they say without challenge. Will I, for one, refuse to do this? A long forgotten journalistic personality there, Mike Gordon Sinclair, he had a lot of things to say, and I have an extra video from him for extra if we get that in. So back to you. Yeah, we certainly will. And Debbie, very briefly, I mean, as you mentioned, the news isn't so good in this country. I believe they're just about to, they've just announced they're about to roll out fluoridation in Cornwall. Well, they're going to be rolling out fluoridation in Cornwall, and plenty of other areas as well. We seem to be going in reverse to the USA in IDERGE. Everyone to go and have a look at Joy Warren's interviews. The Poison Chalice 1 and the Poison Chalice 2, because this piece of news that Mark has just revealed is extremely important moving forward for the UK. Okay, well, let's move on then to the Great Resignation. What is the great, but we've all heard of the Great Reset? Well, part of the plan in the Great Reset, and this is part of the blueprint, the agenda, is the Great Resignation. Don't go any further than the WEF, our good old friends at the World Economic Forum. What is the Great Resignation? Well, what is it? So they go on to say that this is a phenomenon, really, that describes record numbers of people leaving their jobs off to COVID-19, because companies are really struggling how to reevaluate how to retain. Talent. So what can we learn from this? Well, they go on to say that resignation rates are the highest among mid-career employees, and that the resignation rates are also highest in technology and the healthcare industries. But here's a bit of video to give you a bit more information. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] So there you have it, the Great Resignation, and of course with everything, the WEF has always got a solution to the problem, and here's the Future of Jobs Report, because we're going into a massive job shift where we're going to be looking at change with regards to the fourth industrial generation of job creation in big data, cloud computing. We've got business intelligent analysts, they're talking about in their renewable energy, all of these things are going to be covered in this new generation of jobs. And with the NHS, which obviously I'm particularly focusing on the HSJ just bought out this report award round, which is saying that staffing is the issue, they cannot keep staff in the NHS. It is keeping NHS leaders, they're just keeping them awake at night, and Professor Klotz describes a pandemic related epiphany. So what I would say is how many of these epiphanies are caused actually not just by waking up in inverted commas, but how many people are resigning because they're too ill to carry on at work because they're vaccine injured, because they're not receiving any health help at all. And the BMJ go on to ask the question, actually, how do we support and retain staff already stretched to their limit? Well, I'd say put a matron in charge of myself, and maybe I would apply for that job because I think I could make sense of some of this madness that we're seeing right now. OK, thank you, Debbie, and just to end the programme, you have one final video clip there. I do have one final video clip. What has health got to do with an iPhone adapter? Have a look. And the NHS is piloting a new iPhone adapter to check patients for throat cancer. The adapter includes a 32mm lens to check people's throats for signs of cancer. We've hope the new gadget and app will help detect cases early. Has that put you off having an iPhone with an iPhone adapter? Perhaps discussion and extra, Mike? Well, I presume that's mainly for professionals. Well, professionals, yeah, sure, but we're finding that professional capacities are coming into homes, right? We're looking at hospital at home. Are we going to be asked to use our own iPhone adapters? Are we going to be asked to swallow tubes? I don't know anything that's possible. Are we living in 1984? I think we are. I think we've established that. Yes, indeed. OK, thank you, Debbie. Thank you, Mark. We'll leave it there for today. We'll be back in a few minutes. If you are a UK column member, plenty to talk about. Back in a few minutes for extra, that is. Otherwise, have a great weekend. We'll see you at 1pm and Monday, as usual. Bye-bye. At Sprouts Farmers Market, we're all about fresh, healthy, and delicious. That's why you'll find the season's best local and organic produce handpicked and waiting for you in the center of our store. Visit your neighborhood Sprouts Farmers Market today, where fresh produce is always in season.